Cell compatibility / Changeover, tooling and what it depends on

A Range Says The Machine Can Take Your Cell. It Does Not Say Your Line Runs It Tomorrow.

Compatibility is answered with a table. Changeover is answered with a day of your plant standing still. Most quotations answer the first question and let you find the second one after the money has moved.

Send both cell drawings See what changes on the day

⚠️ There is no figure on this page for how long a changeover takes. That is not an omission — section 06 is about why a duration quoted against somebody else's part is worse than no duration at all.

The question this page exists to answer

"We run one cell today and we will run a bigger one in about two years. Does that make this line a two-year purchase?"

— the question behind almost every compatibility enquiry we receive, asked in a dozen different ways. It is a fair question, and the honest answer has three parts rather than one.

Module segment stopped between runs, with a station standing open

ToolingWhat a changeover replaces
Quoted separatelyHow tooling is priced
Within rangeWhere compatibility applies
587 AhOn the roadmap, not today

The day itself, in the order it actually happens

Five things happen, always in this order, and each one waits for the one before it. No step here has a duration attached — what each one waits for is stated instead.

Step 01
The line empties

Work in progress leaves the line before anything is unbolted. What it waits for: how much is on the line when you stop — a scheduling decision, not an equipment one.
Step 02
Tooling comes off, station by station

Not one changeover — a set of them, one per station that touches the part. What it waits for: how many stations carry part-specific tooling on your configuration. → section 05
Step 03
Datums are re-established

Every station that positions the part now positions a different part. What it waits for: whether the new fixture uses the same datum scheme as the old one — a decision made months earlier. → section 07
Step 04
First articles

Parts are made and checked against criteria before anything is called production. What it waits for: whether criteria for the new cell already exist, or have to be written now. → the acceptance document
Step 05
Production resumes

At the same takt as before, because takt is a property of the line, not of the cell. What it waits for: nothing further — if steps 01 to 04 were done in order.

⚠️ Read step 02 twice. The most common misreading of a compatibility range is that a changeover is one event at one machine. It is a set of events, and the count is a property of your line, not of your cell. Everything expensive about changeover day follows from that count.

Assembly line standing empty between production runs — Step 01 — nothing is unbolted until the line is clear

Station with its tooling plate removed and the mounting face exposed — Step 02 — one station, and there are others

First article parts set aside at the end of a line for checking

The part that changes is the part nobody quotes

A fixture is the piece of the machine cut to the shape of your part. It is why a machine can be general and a line can still be specific.

A machine is general — axes, drives, sources, controls; none of them knows your cell
A fixture is specific — it was cut against one envelope and one datum scheme
A program is specific too — positions, order, and what counts as present
A range is neither — it is the set of parts a fixture could be cut for

This is the whole reason the two sentences in the headline are different sentences. A compatibility range describes what fixtures can be made for; it does not describe the fixtures you own. When a supplier answers "yes, compatible" and stops there, they have answered a question about their machine and left the question about your plant standing. The rest of this page is that second question.

The compatibility ranges themselves — cell, module and pack — are published in one place, on the energy-storage pack line page. They are not restated here, because this page is about the day, not the envelope.

Tooling plate on a station, cut to the shape of one part — Rendering — the general machine, and the specific plate bolted to it

Locating features on a carrier that establish where a part sits

Cell presented to a station on its locating features

Take this to any supplier

"Which of your stations carry part-specific tooling on my configuration, and how many of them?"

Three sentences that sound identical, and cost three different amounts

Buyers are rarely misled here on purpose. These three claims are genuinely hard to tell apart in a quotation, and only the third one is free.

"It is compatible"

The most common answer and the least useful one. It means a fixture can be cut for your part within a published range. It says nothing about who cuts it, when, or what the line does while that happens. It is true, and it is not an answer.

"It runs both"

A much stronger claim: tooling for both parts exists and the line switches between them. This is a real capability and it costs real money to have — the tooling for the second part was made and paid for at some point, by somebody.

"It runs both with no changeover"

Treat this one carefully. On a line where stations position the part, running two different parts with nothing changing requires both parts to present identically to every station that touches them. Ask which stations that claim covers.

None of the three is dishonest by itself. What makes them expensive is that they are usually written in the same tone, in the same place on the page, by suppliers who are answering three different questions — and only one of those questions is the one you asked.

Not every station on the line notices that the cell changed

The count in step 02 comes from this distinction, and it is the most useful thing to establish before you compare two quotations for the same changeover.

Station clamping a part in position during assembly

Stations that hold the part

Feeding, stacking and pressing, gluing, welding, testing — anything that clamps, locates or presents the part. These carry part-specific tooling and they are the ones that change. How many there are depends on your configuration, which is why no count is printed here.

Carrier moving a part along a conveying section

Stations that move the part

Conveying and positioning. The carrier holds the part, so the carrier is the part-specific piece. One change here can be worth several elsewhere, because everything downstream inherits the datum the carrier established.

Measuring and scanning station above a part on the line

Stations that only read

Scanning, measuring, judging. Their hardware usually survives a cell change; their programs and criteria do not. ⚠️ A program change is not free just because nothing was unbolted — it still has to be proven on first articles.

The three groups are not equally expensive and not equally quick. Any supplier can tell you which of their stations sit in which group — and the answer being vague is itself an answer. The station-by-station list for our own lines is on the module assembly line page.

Four things decide how long it takes, and none is a constant

This is the question every buyer actually has, and the one this page refuses to answer with a number. What follows is why, and what to ask instead.

A changeover duration is not a property of a machine. It is a property of your configuration, your two parts and your fixture strategy — three things that do not exist until there are drawings. We could print a figure today. It would have been measured on somebody else's line, with somebody else's station count, and you would schedule your plant against it. A wrong number here is worse than no number, because it gets planned around.

01 — How many stations carry tooling

Established from your configuration, not from the cell. This is the multiplier on everything else — and it is knowable before you order, which is why section 11 asks for two drawings rather than two part numbers.

02 — Whether the second fixture exists yet

The largest single factor, and the one most under your control. A fixture designed and made alongside the first turns changeover day into a bolt-on job. A fixture that starts as a drawing on the day turns it into a project.

03 — Whether the datum scheme survives

If the new part locates the same way, stations are re-taught. If it locates differently, they are re-engineered. This is decided at fixture design time, months before anyone stands in front of the machine. → section 07

04 — Whether the criteria already exist

First articles are checked against something. If acceptance criteria for the new cell were written during the original project, this is a morning's work. If they have to be agreed now, the line waits for a conversation. → acceptance document

⚠️ We do not publish delivery or warranty terms anywhere on this site until they are confirmed, and a changeover duration falls in the same category: not withheld to be coy, withheld because a published figure has to be one we can be held to.

Line of stations seen along its length, each one a place where tooling may change — Rendering — the multiplier is the number of stations, not the size of the cell

Second set of tooling stored beside the line ready to be fitted

Checking station where first articles are verified against criteria

Three decisions taken now that shorten a day two years away

All three are free at the design stage and expensive afterwards, which is the only reason this section sits this early on the page.

Two different cell formats set side by side for comparison

Name the second cell now, even loosely

"Something bigger in two years" is enough to change fixture design. A fixture designed knowing a second envelope is coming is not more expensive than one designed for a single part — it is the same job with better information.

Locating features shared between two different part sizes

Ask for a shared datum scheme

If both parts can locate on the same features, the second changeover is teaching rather than engineering. This cannot be retrofitted cheaply — it is a decision that lives in the first fixture drawing.

Line under construction, the stage at which tooling decisions are still open

Have the second tooling quoted with the first

Not necessarily bought — quoted. A price agreed while the project is live is a different negotiation from a price asked for two years later, and it lets you decide when to spend rather than discovering what it costs.

⚠️ None of these three is a product we sell. They are decisions you make with whoever builds your line — including if that is not us.

The second one is a different job from the first

Almost everything written about changeover describes the first one. The first is where the cost sits; the ones after it are where the assumption gets made.

The first time

Tooling is designed, made and proven. Datums are established for a part the line has never seen. Criteria are written. This is engineering work and it is priced as engineering work — which is why it is quoted separately rather than folded into a line item nobody can check.

Every time after

Tooling exists and goes back on. Stations are re-taught rather than re-engineered. First articles are checked against criteria that already exist. Same physical work, a fraction of the elapsed time — and that difference is what the decisions in section 07 buy you.

Which is why the useful question to a supplier is not "how long is a changeover" but "how long is the second one, and what did the first one leave behind that makes it shorter?" A supplier who cannot separate those two has quoted you one number for two different jobs.

Line running again after a changeover, at the same takt as before — Rendering — the line after the second changeover looks exactly like the line before it

Large-format cells are on the roadmap, and that is the word

This is where a page like this usually gets vague, so the sentence is put plainly instead: it is a direction we are working toward, not a capability today.

✅ On the roadmap — 587 Ah large-format cells are what we are working toward
Not a published capability — do not plan a line around it on the strength of this page
Ask directly — if your programme needs it, that is a conversation with dates, not a web page

The alternative to this paragraph would have been to put the figure into a compatibility table and let you assume. We would rather lose the enquiry than have you find out during a project. The published ranges cover what is proven today and they live on the energy-storage pack line page. Anything beyond them, including this, is a conversation before it is a specification.

⚠️ This is the same discipline applied everywhere on this site: delivery time, warranty, and weld criteria for the off-line gantry machine are all blank for the same reason. Blank is a position, not an oversight.

Bay laid out for a line, with space that a future format would occupy — Rendering — the ranges we publish cover what is proven, not what is planned

Prismatic cells of the format the published ranges cover

Module segment built for the formats currently published

Tooling is quoted separately, and that is deliberate

It would be easy to fold it into the line price and easier to sell. Here is what separating it buys you, and what it costs us to do it this way.

You can see what a second part costs

A separate line item is a number you can compare, defer, or take to somebody else. Folded into a line price, the same money becomes invisible — and invisible money is impossible to plan against when the second cell arrives.

You can buy it later

Quoted now, ordered when you need it. The quotation is the useful artefact, not the purchase — it turns "what will this cost us" into a number in a file rather than a question for a future meeting.

What it costs us

Our line price looks less complete than one that quietly includes it. We accept that. A buyer comparing line by line finds this quotation longer and clearer; a buyer comparing only totals finds it higher. That trade is made on purpose.

Within the published compatibility ranges, changing the product means changing tooling, and changed tooling is quoted as its own item. That single sentence is the whole commercial position, and it is the same sentence whether you are changing cells next quarter or in three years.

Line configured for one product, quoted as a set of line items

Tooling set stored on a rack beside the line

Bay layout showing the line and the space kept for tooling storage

Two drawings and one sentence, and the answer gets specific

Everything on this page turns into a real answer once these exist. Two part numbers are not enough — a part number describes a cell, not how it presents to a station.

Prismatic cells as delivered, the format currently in production

The cell you run now

Drawing or datasheet, whichever exists. What matters is the envelope and the terminal face — how the part presents to a station that has to hold it and find things on it.

Larger-format cell of the kind a future changeover would introduce

The cell you expect to run

Even a draft, even a family rather than a part. A draft is genuinely useful here — fixture design changes shape with a second envelope in view, and it changes shape whether that envelope is final or not.

Cells staged beside a line ahead of a production change

One sentence about when

"Within a year", "when the customer confirms", "we do not know yet". All three are usable answers. What is not usable is silence, because silence gets designed for as if it were never.

What comes back: which stations on your configuration carry part-specific tooling, whether a shared datum scheme is possible across your two parts, and the second tooling set quoted as its own line item.

Ask three suppliers, and you will get these three answers

The columns are not good, better and best. They are three genuinely different things a supplier can mean by the word compatible, and they cost differently.

What you asked	The range and the dayWhat we aim to give	The range onlyThe common answer	"No changeover needed"The one to probe
What is actually stated	Compatible within a range, and what changes on the day	Compatible within a range	Both parts run and nothing changes
Tooling	Named as a separate item, and quoted	Not mentioned	Implied not to exist
Who carries the risk	Shared, and written down	⚠️ You — discovered later	⚠️ You — discovered on the day
What to ask next	Which stations, and whether the datum is shared	Which stations carry part-specific tooling	Which stations that claim covers

The third column is not necessarily false. It is unfinished — it can be entirely true for two parts that present identically to every station that touches them, and it is worth exactly as much as the list of stations behind it. The difference between a strong supplier and a weak one here is not the claim; it is whether the list exists.

Locating pins and clamps on a fixture plate

Terminal face of a prismatic cell, the feature stations locate against

Send both cells and we will map the changeover

The one you run and the one you expect to run, plus one sentence about when. What comes back is a station list, a datum answer and a tooling quotation.

What comes back

The stations on your configuration that carry part-specific tooling, whether both parts can share a datum scheme, and the second tooling set quoted as its own item — so it becomes a number you hold rather than a question you carry.

If the second cell is undecided

Send the first one and say so. Fixture design changes shape the moment a second envelope is even possible, and "undecided" is a far better input than a blank.

Go to the enquiry form WhatsApp

sales@batterylinepro.com

Phone / WhatsApp

+86 15327155363

Address

Wuhan, Hubei, China

Response

Reply within 24 hours